[Youngian]

Meanwhile, in other news.

Probably best not to shout about that one. Those in desperate need of help will receive it. Those who can't afford children get very angry about their taxes going to Vicky Pollard to pop out more kids.

[Boiler]

Whilst the majority of Guardian BTLers are frothing at a gash in hope that Starmer is going to follow the towel-folding CUNT out of the door, a sane comment appeared.

Screenshot 2026-02-04 at 13-30-22 (1) Mandelson ‘lied repeatedly’ over Epstein links and betrayed Britain Starmer says – UK politics live.png (51.87 KiB) Viewed 116 times

And now I shall go and brave the cold and change the defective ignition coil on my car, which is causing a misfire (assuming the diagnostics aren't lying). It will be a better use of my time...

[Abernathy]

It has briefly crossed my mind that maybe - just maybe- it may be better for Labour if Keir Starmer decides to make a clean breast of things, follow in the (almost forgotten) footsteps of Peter Carrington and announce his resignation as PM and Labour leader on really, a point of honour (a real rarity these days). He would, I think, accrue some considerable credit in doing so , leave the party with the opportunity to elect a new leader (Streeting or Rayner, one presumes) and address the supposed issue of the party’s and his leadership’s personal polling popularity - or the lack of it - and perhaps go forward in a new, more positive direction of continuing recovery for the UK (and for Labour). The Mandelson debacle is, I think, possibly of sufficient magnitude and seriousness as to perhaps warrant such a course of action.

On the other hand, a change of the UK’s Prime Minister at the present time, given the parlous state of the world on several fronts - Ukraine, the UK’s necessary reconstruction of its relations with the EU, Putin, Trump, Israel/Gaza - would seem like madness. Starmer has in fact done a fantastic job of navigating all of these fronts to date.

Also, having watched today’s PMQs, where Badenoch used all six of her questions on Mandelson in a failed attempt to skewer Starmer, I don’t think he is about to do that (though he may well have considered it). If it were done, to quote MacBeth, then ‘t’were best done quickly, and I sense the moment has passed.

Anyway, as I say, it has crossed my mind, but that’s all.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

Those in desperate need of help will receive it. Those who can't afford children get very angry about their taxes going to Vicky Pollard to pop out more kids.

That's an incredibly negative point of view and no reason not to help those in need. In fact, I think that may be the whole point of the welfare state, and the many ways people are helped...
Do we allow healthy people to abstain from paying in to the NHS, or childless people stop contributing to education?

[Tubby Isaacs]

He’s saying you do help those in need, but you don’t particularly campaign on it because it’s unpopular (including with lots of Labour voters). To use the phrase current in the noughties, do good by stealth.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I wouldn’t change the PM now. Nobody would believe it was a resignation on principle anyway.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Everyone wants Mandelson prosecuted. He's being investigated. So you have to worry about prejudicing trials. That seems to have been what the Met have contacted the Government about.

Yet every gobshite, including loads in Labour, have rushed in to call it a cover up. Silly comparisons with Owen Paterson and Chris Pincher affairs, where there wasn't going to be a trial.

Rayner in particular is behaving very badly towards Starmer.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

He’s saying you do help those in need, but you don’t particularly campaign on it because it’s unpopular (including with lots of Labour voters). To use the phrase current in the noughties, do good by stealth.

Yes. And I am saying that is a very negative point of view.

[Tubby Isaacs]

The negative view of the public is well justified on this score.

I see we're now on to the Intelligence Committee reviewing the Mandelson documents. While there are some heavyweights on that, one of them is John Hayes, He was the MP Braverman was proving privileged information to when she resigned. I'm sure we can trust that he'll be entirely honorable.

The Labour MPs forcing this on the Government are a disgrace. Same as the ones who've gobshited about the Hillsborough Bill on similar grounds. There can be justified reasons for things not be released. Because of the antics of these Labour MPs, the Government, having gone further in openness than any one else, is being portrayed as dodgy and secretive. I thought losing the Jez tendency might leave us with a reasonably grown up PLP, but I'm afraid that seems to be too much to expect.

[Tubby Isaacs]

So Starmer's agreed. Probably had no choice.

In John Hayes we trust, I guess.